LOG IN / REGISTER




re: Funny Girl 1964 vs 2022 Very Long
Posted by: Delvino 10:48 am EDT 08/08/22
In reply to: re: Funny Girl 1964 vs 2022 Very Long - Ann 05:13 am EDT 08/08/22

I agree. As I said to someone after I saw it, "Who knew that Funny Girl only deserved Encores?" The book issues are so structural, the Fierstein work is almost irrelevant. This house didn't need a coat of paint; it needed a new basement. It's startling to watch how the show strains to contain its root-for: an unlikely star aiming for a shot at the bigtime. A perfectly legitimate story construct that's actually undercut rather than helped by the romantic plot, which intrudes on act one -- sorry, the way it plays out -- as the biggest obstacle in Fanny's life, not enhancement. Yes, okay, that seemingly makes her story complicated. But the show doesn't seem to know how it feels about Nick, and Fanny's accommodations. The scene that gives us the signature act one close to me makes no storytelling sense. This woman abandons the sought-after career in a heartbeat to belt a vehement warning to anyone who dares stop her, including Ziegfeld. She then gets the guy, to a point, and spends an hour wrestling with what we already know: he's woefully unworthy of her. Maybe that's a complex love story, but if it is, the show doesn't set it up. Does Fanny dream of being loved? Not really; she's the greatest star. Nick is suddenly a goal demanding the jettisoning of a career, and then an obstacle. And the second act -- Styne triumphs aside -- just grinds on until the titular character faces her bad choice. To me, and others disagree, it's so fundamentally wrong-headed as satisfying story, it's just unfixable.
reply

Previous: re: Funny Girl 1964 vs 2022 Very Long - Ann 05:13 am EDT 08/08/22
Next: re: Funny Girl 1964 vs 2022 : Streisand wasnt quite 'Streisand' when FUNNY GIRL was on Broadway ... - NewtonUK 06:48 am EDT 08/08/22
Thread:

    Privacy Policy


    Time to render: 0.009022 seconds.